ILNews

Bingham McHale merging with Louisville firm

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indianapolis-based law firm Bingham McHale will merge with Louisville-based law firm Greenebaum Doll & McDonald, a regional firm that explored the possibility of merging with another Indiana firm three years ago.

The two law firms announced Wednesday morning that members had voted in support of the merger between Bingham McHale and the 117-lawyer firm Greenebaum Doll & McDonald, creating what will become Bingham Greenebaum Doll with nearly 250 attorneys once the merger takes effect Jan. 2.

Bingham McHale’s managing partner Toby McClamroch told Indiana Lawyer the merger moved quickly and has been in the works for about 10 weeks. It was specifically the transactional, tax and natural resources practice areas of Greenebaum that were the most appealing to Bingham, he said.

In a written statement, McClamroch said, “Bingham McHale LLP is not only increasing the depth and breadth of our experience in key areas such as tax and finance, but we are also entering into a true merger that honors both firms’ histories and current successes.”

With 130 lawyer and 11 paralegals currently, Bingham is listed as the fourth-largest firm in Indianapolis, and its roots date back to 1919. Formerly known as Bingham Summers Welsh & Spilman, it merged with local competitor McHale Cook & Welch in 2001 to form Bingham McHale.

Greenebaum Doll & McDonald began exploring a merger with Indianapolis firm Ice Miller in December 2008, but no merger occurred.

“We will be expanding our geographic footprint and strengthening our knowledge base in areas such as governmental work and municipal bonding,” Greenebaum Chairman Phillip D. Scott said in a statement.

The combined firm will retain Bingham’s offices in Indianapolis, Jasper and Vincennes and will also add an office in Evansville at the start of the year. Greenebaum’s offices in Louisville, Lexington, and Frankfort, Ky., and Cincinnati, Ohio, will also be retained.

Bingham McHale’s clients include Gatorade Trust, the group that invented the Gatorade sports drink; locally based mall giant Simon Property Group Inc.; and French-based Saint-Gobain, a large building-materials company that has operations in Indianapolis. Greenebaum Doll’s clients include Louisville insurer Humana Inc. and franchisees of the KFC restaurant chain.

This has been an active year for local law firm mergers, with several others announced in recent months to take effect at the start of 2012.

Most recently, the Evansville firms of Kahn Dees Donovan & Kahn and Lavallo & Frank in Dec. 11 announced they’d be joining together under the name of Kahn Dees Donovan & Kahn effective Jan. 1. Together, the combined firm will have 30 attorneys.

In October, 221-attorney firm Baker & Daniels, based in Indianapolis, announced a merger with 500-lawyer Faegre & Benson in Minneapolis, and effective Jan. 1 the combined firm will be known as Faegre Baker Daniels.

That came after the August announcement by Ice Miller that it would combine its 224-attorneys with the 90-attorney firm Schottenstein Zox & Dunn in Columbus, Ohio. That merger takes effect Jan. 1, but will not result in a departure from the Ice Miller name.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  2. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  3. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  4. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

  5. Here's an idea...how about we MORE heavily regulate the law schools to reduce the surplus of graduates, driving starting salaries up for those new grads, so that we can all pay our insane amount of student loans off in a reasonable amount of time and then be able to afford to do pro bono & low-fee work? I've got friends in other industries, radiology for example, and their schools accept a very limited number of students so there will never be a glut of new grads and everyone's pay stays high. For example, my radiologist friend's school accepted just six new students per year.

ADVERTISEMENT